HAKIM’S PREFERENCE THEORY
IN THE CZECH CONTEXT*)
LADISLAV RABUŠIC – BEATRICE-ELENA CHROMKOVÁ MANEA**)
Abstract: The article presents a test of Catherine Hakim’s preference theory in the Czech
environment. Using data from a representative survey of Czech women between the ages of
20 and 40 the authors first test to what extent Czech women conform to the typology of homecentred, work-centred and adaptive women. In the second part of the article the authors test
whether this typology is a good predictor of Czech fertility and whether it influences the
attitudes of Czech women on family policy measures.
Keywords: preference theory, fertility, family models, family policies, work
In 2002 the ‘preference theory’ proposed by the British sociologist Catherine Hakim first
appeared in literature mapping the causes of low fertility in modern developed countries. She
presented the theory in a series of articles and books (see, e.g., Hakim, 2000, 2003a, 2003b),
and it sparked off considerable interest. In the preference theory, Hakim tries to explain women’s lifestyle preferences based on their participation in the labour market, indicating whether their preferences steer them towards employment and building a career at work, or whether they are drawn more towards having a family and raising children. Hakim interprets lifestyle as a factor that can have a significant impact on women’s fertility1).
The preference theory puts forth a typology of women based on their relationship to family
and paid work. Hakim distinguishes three types of women based on lifestyle preferences:
I. Home-centred women, who prefer to devote themselves to the family and household and
tend to have larger families; they only seek work if it is necessary to maintain the family
budget.
II. Work-centred women, who realise themselves more through work than through family;
they form a kind of counterpart to the preceding type.
III. Adaptive women, who try to combine their work at the workplace and at home; they are
a kind of mixture of types I and II.
Hakim’s typology was empirically tested using the theory’s indicators in representative
studies of the populations of Great Britain and Spain. The empirical data from these studies
produce a normal distribution curve and show that 20% of women are home-centred, 60%
adaptive, and 20% work-centred (Hakim, 2000: 6). According to Hakim, an important feature
of this typology should be that women in each lifestyle type are inclined to have a different
number of children. In Hakim’s view, this fact should make it possible to predict the reproductive behaviour of women in relation to the social and family policy of the state.
In this context Hakim draws attention to an error often committed by politicians when introducing measures designed to increase fertility in the country. Women with different lifestyle preferences respond differently to family and population policy measures, and that usu*)
This article was published in Demografie 2007, 49, p. 77–86. The contents of the journal are published on the
website of the Czech Statistical Office at: http://www.czso.cz/csu/redakce.nsf/i/demografie.
Direct all correspondence to: Prof. PhDr. Ladislav Rabušic, CSc., Department of Sociology, Faculty of Social Studies,
Masaryk Univesity, Joštova 10, 602 00 Brno, Czech Republic, [email protected]; Beatrice-Elena Chromková Manea,
M.A. Institut for Studies on Social Reproduction and Integration, Faculty of Social Studies, Masaryk University, Joštova
10, 602 00 Brno, Czech Republic, [email protected].
1)
We have already presented the preference theory in more detail elsewhere, in Manea, Mrázová and Rabušic (2006).
**)
46
Ladislav Rabušic – Beatrice-Elena Chromková Manea: Hakim’s Preference Theory in the Czech Context
ally prevents the measures from achieving their intended outcome2). For example, home-centred women should respond to changes in the state’s fiscal policy. If the state fiscal policy reduces the tax burden on families with children women in this lifestyle type tend to have a
large family and stay at home with the children. The situation is different in the case of adaptive women, who respond to policies or programmes aimed at helping them achieve a worklife balance. Work-centred women are not sensitive to any family or population policies.
What is most important for them are policies directed at combating discrimination on the basis of gender, race, or marital status.
The objective of this article is to determine whether the preference theory also applies to
the Czech Republic and specifically to the population of Czech women. Three basic research
questions can be drawn from the preference theory, and they are the subject of our analyses
here: 1) First we will ask whether the same distribution of individual types of women can be
found in the Czech Republic as Hakim found in her data; 2) We will verify whether there are
significant differences by lifestyle type between the approaches women take to fertility; 3) Finally, we will determine whether there are differences by lifestyle type between the way
women view individual measures in Czech family policy.
Methodology
These three research questions are analysed using data from a sociological survey carried
out in the Czech Republic at the end of 2005. The research agency SC & C collected the data
by administering a standardised questionnaire to a random sample of the population made up
of women between the ages of 20 and 40 and also their husband or partner if they shared the
same household; the age of the men was not limited. If the woman lived alone and was in the
defined age group she was included in the sample. If the interviewers came across a man between the ages of 20 and 40 and living alone, he was administered a male questionnaire and
also included in the sample. Data was collected from a total of 2546 respondents. In this article, for obvious reasons, we will be focusing just on the sub-sample of women made up of
1284 respondents.
Formulating a relevant typology was of key importance in this analysis. This was done in
cooperation with Hakim by using her set of questions (see the Appendix). Home-centred
women are defined as women who selected the third response under question H5 and for
whom work is not their focal interest. Work-centrality was determined on the basis of questions H4 and H6. Work-centred women are women who would continue to work even if the
family income was high enough to allow them to remain at home (the first response to question H4) and who are the main source or contribute equally with their husband/partner to
household income (the first or third response to question H6). Work-centred women are those
who selected the first response under question H5 and for whom work is their focal interest
(based on work-centrality). Adaptive women are those who do not fall into either one of the
two types.
Findings
Hakim’s typology in the Czech Republic
Table 1 shows the distribution of women according to individual lifestyle preferences. It
also presents similar data for Great Britain and Spain drawn from Hakim’s publication. The
comparison of Czech data with foreign data is not ideal, as Hakim worked with data for a different age group of women, but the table does provide a kind of illustrative comparison.
2)
It is a question whether her emphasis on the woman as the key element in determining the ultimate number of children is not perhaps somewhat erroneous. Hakim claims that ‘romantics wanted to believe that couples decide together how many children they have, but in reality just one of the partners always has the decisive word’ (2003a: 369).
And in this she has the woman in mind.
47
Czech Demography, 2008, Vol. 2
Table 1 National distributions of lifestyle preference among women, Czech Republic, Great Britain and Spain, in %
Country
Czech Republic
Women aged 20–40 years
Working women
Married women aged 20–40 years
United Kingdom
Women aged 16–64 years
Working women
Married women aged 20–59 years
Spain
Women aged 18–64 years
Working women
Married women aged 20–59 years
Home-centred women
Adaptive women
Work-centred women
16
14
14
70
69
75
13
17
11
14
11
13
71
72
77
15
17
10
14
5
15
71
67
73
15
28
12
Source: Authors’ calculations for the Czech Republic from a data file from the MPR 2005; for Great Britain and Spain, Hakim (2003b: 85).
Like in the two other countries in the comparison, the Czech distribution of lifestyle preferences
is relatively normal, but somewhat high. This means that the middle variant is larger than it should
be for an ideal distribution. However, the share of adaptive women is also much higher than the
other two types. There is a somewhat larger share of home-centred women (16%) in the Czech
sample than work-centred women (13%), but the difference, though statistically significant at
0,05, is negligible. However, these shares are turned around in the sub-sample of employed women, where work-centred women make up the larger share. In the sub-sample of married women
(which made up 49% of the sample) the share of adaptive women is very high, at 75%.
The Czech typological distribution is more or less similar to those seen in Great Britain and
Spain. Given that these three countries have considerably different economic, social and cultural landscapes, this finding would suggest that there is a universal validity to Hakim’s typology, as it has been empirically confirmed in three diverse cultures. However, the problem is
that it is hard to accept this typological distribution because when the absolute majority of
cases in every country fall into the middle category we have to wonder if this concept is being operationalised properly. We will return to this question in the final part of this article.
What characteristics are relevant to each type of lifestyle preference? Table 2 shows that
among Czech women there is a link between typology and education: the best-educated
women are more often work-centred women, while the least-educated women are more often
home-centred women. Subjective class ranking works similarly: the higher the subjective
class ranking the larger the share of work-centred women and the lower the share of homecentred women. We also found that women who were employed at the time of the research
were more often work-centred than unemployed women, who, based on their responses, also
more often belonged to the home-centred type of women. A woman’s religious orientation
did not play any role in the typology, though it could have been assumed that women with
strong religious convictions would be more inclined to be the home-centred type3). The older
women (aged 30-40) were typologically more work-centred than the younger women in the
sample. Widowed and divorced women were also more work-centred than other marital status categories. In relation to the number of children a woman has, women with more than
three children were most often the home-centred type4).
3)
Understandably there is a relatively strong correlation between the education of the respondent and her subjective
self-classification (Goodman-Kruskal gamma for ordinal data is = +0,66; p < 0.001).
More than one-half of the women in our sample worked full time, 11% were at home, 7% were unemployed, and
5% worked part time.
4)
48
Ladislav Rabušic – Beatrice-Elena Chromková Manea: Hakim’s Preference Theory in the Czech Context
Table 2 Lifestyle preferences among women aged 20–40 in the Czech Republic by various socio-demographic
characteristics, in %
Indicator
Age group
20–29
30–40
Education
Basic
Secondary vocational/
Secondary without maturita
Secondary with maturita
University
Marital status
Married
Widowed
Divorced
Separation of spouses
Single
Operate position4)
Employed
Unemployed
Current number of children Childless
1 child
2 children
3+ children
The role of religion in life* Important
Unimportant
Subjective class
Low/working class
Lower-middle class
Middle
Upper-middle/upper class
Total
Work-centred women
11
16
10
Adaptive women
73
68
59
Home-centred women
16
16
31
11
71
18
14
26
11
25
22
0
13
17
6
14
14
14
9
13
14
13
10
15
24
13
73
59
75
47
63
73
67
69
71
69
71
72
66
72
70
65
74
71
66
70
13
15
14
27
15
27
19
14
23
17
16
14
25
14
17
22
16
15
10
16
Source: Data file MPR 2005.
Note: *Four-item scale; here only the extreme fields are presented.
Given that the bivariance relations in Table 2 may conceal some apparent or even false associations, we also included these variables in a multinomial logistic regression. The findings
from the regression are not presented here, as the regression model does not reproduce the
data satisfactorily and adds no additional information that could not be drawn already from
the tables of second-order categorisation – the variables used do not influence differences in
preferences and the odds ratios come out statistically insignificant.
We tested the typology’s validity by relating it to questions examining a similar phenomenon but formulated differently than the questions used to create the typology. If the typology
is valid the answers should break down logically into consistent categories. Table 3 shows
that this is the case. In all the statements (except statement 8) the views of home-centred
women are genuinely much more pro-family than the views of work-centred women, while
adaptive women (though not in such a clear-cut manner) always ranked in the centre5). From
this perspective, Hakim’s typology differentiates in the Czech context as intended.
5)
Czech feminists will probably be somewhat disappointed by attitudes to statement no. 1. A full 47% of women
aged 20–40 agreed with this statement, and only 26% disagreed.
49
Czech Demography, 2008, Vol. 2
Table 3 Opinions on gender roles, work and family by lifestyle preferences in the Czech Republic, answers “agree”, in %
Statement
1. It is the man’s job to earn money, and a woman’s job to look after the
household and the family’
2. Working mothers can have just as close a relationship with their children
and given them the same sense of security as mothers who don’t work
3. A woman can derive the same satisfaction from being a homemaker as
she can from working
4. Working is a good thing, but what most women really want is a home
and a family
5. Women want to have both a family and children
6. Working is so demanding on men today that they don’t have time to
devote to their family
7. Today families who want to have children have to share the task
of caring for the children much more than before
8. Fathers are as well-equipped to care for their children as mothers are
Work-centred
Home-centred Total “agree”
Adaptive
women
women
abs.
%
23
47
64
590
47
91
78
72
978
79
16
26
39
333
27
43
63
65
744
61
92
84
65
1013
82
22
38
40
455
36
74
64
60
817
65
52
46
47
594
47
Source: Data file MPR 2005.
Note: *Opinions on these statements were measured on a five-point Likert scale; the responses “wholly agree” and “agree” were
merged for presentation in this table.
To sum up in response to our first question, in the Czech Republic Hakim’s typology has
a distribution similar to that in some other countries. The majority of women in the Czech Republic also fall into the adaptive category: in their responses to the questions these women
hesitated over whether they clearly favoured work and their job or whether they were more
strongly inclined towards the family. The typology of women by lifestyle preferences proved
valid as a predictor of opinions on the roles of men and women in the family and the relationship between the family and employment. The individual types of women based on Hakim’s
guidelines held the views it was assumed they would.
Does this typological differentiation have an effect on women’s fertility? According to
Hakim’s theory, it should have, and we have data that will allow us to answer this question.
Hakim’s typology and fertility
The second question we are addressing in this article is whether the three types of women
we defined also have significantly different fertility rates. The women included in the sample
are at an age where many of them still have their reproductive life before them, while others
have already completed their fertility. To address this, we used a variable that we called “hypothetical” (or expected) completed fertility. As its name suggests, it is similar to the demographic concept of completed fertility, but we calculated it as a sum of the number of children
that the respondent has and the number of children that she would like to have in the future.
The resulting datum summing up how many children a woman will probably have in her lifetime is thus a construct that is compiled out of already existing components (the actual
number of children a woman has) and expected components (the planned number of children), which means it is not a certainty and is therefore referred to as “hypothetical”.
As the data in Table 4 show, we must (unfortunately and with regret) confirm that Hakim’s
typology has little effect on the hypothetical completed fertility (HCF) of Czech women. In
the 20–29 age group the HCF of home-centred women is the lowest of all three types (1,64),
even though we ought to expect the reverse. While it is true that the difference between opposite types of women is small (though statistically significant, as the dispersion analysis
demonstrated, so it can be expected to be found even in the basic sample), it is oriented in the
“wrong” direction. The sequential correlation between the typology and the HCF, measured
50
Ladislav Rabušic – Beatrice-Elena Chromková Manea: Hakim’s Preference Theory in the Czech Context
as a gamma coefficient, is very small and statistically insignificant (0,16; p > 0,05)6). In the
30-40 age group the highest HCF is observed among adaptive women (1,92) followed by
family-centred women (1,89), and work-centred women have the lowest HCF (1,76). The differences are of course very small, and moreover statistically insignificant, which means that
the three types will not be different in the Czech Republic. The sequential correlation is almost zero and it is statistically insignificant (0,06; p > 0,05).
Table 4 Fertility indicators by age groups and Hakim’s typology in the Czech Republic – mean number of children
Age group
20–29 let
30–40 let
CNCHI)
1.38
1.78
Work-centred women
NOCHII)
HCFIII)
1.68
1.82
1.37
1.76
CNCH
1.45
1.90
Adaptive
NOCH
1.73
1.34
HCF
1.88
1.92
Home-centred women
CNCH
NOCH
HCF
1.57
1.76
1.64
2.01
1.74
1.89
Source: Data file MPR 2005.
Note: I) CNCH – current number of children (mean); II) NOCH – number of other children (mean); III) HCF – hypothetical completed
fertility.
We find similar relations when, instead of the HCF, the variable in the analysis is the
number of children the woman currently has (CNCH in Table 4) or the number of children
the woman would like to have (NOCH in Table 4). For example, in the 30–40 age group, the
average number of children for each individual type is 1.78 x 1.90 x 2.01. The differences between the averages are statistically insignificant and the sequential correlation between the
typology and the number of children in this age group is close to zero and is also statistically
insignificant (gamma = 0,11, p >).
Another indicator signalising that Hakim’s typology is not a good predictor of fertility in
the Czech Republic is the relationship between this typology and the value of children indicator. Based on Hakim’s theory we would expect women’s perceptions of the value of children to differ by lifestyle preferences. But this is not the case. Table 5 shows that work-centred and adaptive women more strongly emphasise the value of children (i.e. they agree with
the statement that a person must have children in order to have fulfilment in life) than homecentred women. This finding also tells us that even Czech career women desire to have children, again confirming a conclusion reached by many other analysts, that being able to
achieve a work-life balance is extremely significant for increasing fertility in the Czech
Republic7). Conversely, it is more often home-centred than work-centred women who agree
with the statement that children are not essential to a person’s self-fulfilment, while based on
Hakim’s theory the opposite distribution would be expected.
The final piece of evidence that Hakim’s typology is not a good indicator of (expected) fertility in the Czech Republic is the data on the average number of children that women in our
sample over the age of 36 have. We know from age-specific fertility that fertility among
Czech women after the age of 36 is very low, so with some licence we can assume that the
number they have at age 36 is their completed fertility. Table 6 shows that there is no difference between work-centred and home-centred women with regard to the average number of
children they have, and moreover, the highest intensity of completed fertility is observed
among adaptive women.
6)
With some statistical licence, this typology can be regarded as an ordinal type of variable.
For example, Rychtaříková (2003) claims that the conflict between a woman’s work commitments and her traditional role in the family has led to the sharp decline in fertility. Based on empirical data Kocourková (2001) found
that women would consider having another child if they had the option of working part time or if they had the option
of flexible working hours.
7)
51
Czech Demography, 2008, Vol. 2
Table 5 Perception of the value of children by Hakim’s typology in the Czech Republic, share of responses agreeing with
the statement (N = 1232), in %
Statement
To have fulfilment in life, a person must have children
Today’s world offers many opportunities for achieving fulfilment
in life that a child is no longer actually necessary
Work-centred women
91
Adaptive
93 + + +
Home-centred women
79 – – –
9
7–––
21 + + +
Source: Data file MPR 2005.
Note: The symbols optically underscore the cells where the frequency is significantly different from the expected frequency on
the assumption of the independence of the observed indicators. The symbol “+” indicates a higher measured frequency compared to expectations; the symbol “- ” indicates the opposite. In each cell there can be one to three plus or minus symbols based
on the statistical significance of deviation (95%, 99%, 99.9%).
Table 6 The average number of children of women aged 36+ by Hakim’s typology
Age group
36+
Work-centred women
1.54
Adaptive
1.82
Home-centred women
1.59
N
1.73 (N = 289)
Source: Data file MPR 2005.
Hakim’s typology and family policy
It follows from Hakim’s theory that women’s perceptions of family policy measures designed to facilitate childcare and parenthood and make it easier to combine work and family
responsibilities should differ by lifestyle preference. In our research we formulated sixteen
such measures and asked respondents to rank them by subjective importance8). Table 7 shows
the total support respondents gave to the four measures they identified as the most important.
The preferences show that Hakim’s typology does work in this case and women differ by
lifestyle preference in their attitudes towards family policy measures. Home-centred women
more often favoured extending paid maternity leave at 90% of the previous wage (compared
to work-centred women the ratio is 57:42), significantly increasing the child allowance
(50:42), and increasing the amount of the birth benefit (24:12). Conversely, work-centred
women more often than home-centred women selected measures connected with work: support for flexible working hours or part-time work (38:20), increasing the number of nurseries
and kindergartens (19:10), ensuring adequate availability of childcare facilities for schoolage children (14:5). The differences were not that significant in the case of other measures.
Differences in preferences were similarly found with regard to which family policy measures work-centred women and home-centred women selected as the least important for making parenthood easier (Tab. 8).
Work-centred women more than home-centred women viewed increasing the birth benefit
(17:6) and the existence of newlywed loans (12:4) as of absolutely no importance. Logically,
home-centred women considered the least important measure that of allowing the father to be
on maternity/parental leave instead of the mother (25:16) – these women naturally see childcare as their domain. They also ascribed little importance to measures aimed at increasing the
number of nursery schools and kindergartens (13:4) – they have no need for them as they are
at home with their children.
8)
The wording of the question was: In state family policy there are measures that are designed to make parenthood
and childcare easier and to make it possible to better combine working in the labour market and family responsibilities. Select four from the following selection that you see as the most important in this regard. Arrange them in order of importance.
52
Ladislav Rabušic – Beatrice-Elena Chromková Manea: Hakim’s Preference Theory in the Czech Context
Table 7 Hakim’s typology and the family policy measures that female respondents in the Czech Republic consider the
most important for helping them combine work and family responsibilities (in%; the measures are listed according to
the preferences of work-oriented women)
Measures
Work-centred women
Adaptive
42
42
38
28
23
23
19
16
48
41
32
28
20
22
15
22
Home-centred
women
57
50
20
28
20
28
10
20
14
8
5
12
11
10
18
10
11
24
5
13
9
7
8
6
4
3
10
5
3
9
3
1
Extending paid maternity leave at 90% of the previous wage
Significantly increasing the child allowance
Support for flexible working hours or part-time work
Reducing the taxes of people with minor children
Reducing the costs of child education
More affordable housing for families with children
Increasing the number of nurseries and kindergartens
Stronger measures against unemployment
Ensuring adequate availability of childcare facilities for school-age
children
Increasing the birth benefit
Better job protection legislation for parents
The existence of newlywed loans
Requiring employers to allow mothers/fathers with children
under the age of 10 to have 1–2 days off every month
Reducing the length of parental leave, increasing the parental allowance
Making kindergartens and nurseries more affordable
Allowing the father to be on parental leave instead of the mother
Source: Data file MPR 2005.
Table 8 Hakim’s typology and the family policy measures that female respondents in the Czech Republic consider the
least important for helping them combine work and family responsibilities (in%; the measures are listed according to
the preferences of work-oriented women)
Measures
Increasing the birth benefit
Allowing the father to be on parental leave instead of the mother
Requiring employers to allow mothers/fathers with children under the
age of 10 to have 1-2 days off every month
The existence of newlywed loans
Making kindergartens and nurseries more affordable
Better job protection legislation for parents
Reducing the length of parental leave, increasing the parental
allowance
Increasing the number of nurseries and kindergartens
Reducing the costs of child education
Ensuring adequate availability of childcare facilities for school-age
children
Extending paid maternity leave at 90% of the previous wage
Reducing the taxes of people with minor children
Support for flexible working hours or part-time work
Stronger measures against unemployment
More affordable housing for families with children
Significantly increasing the child allowance
Work-centred
women
17
16
9
17
Home-centred
women
6
25
14
11
6
11
12
8
6
9
13
4
4
9
5
9
12
4
5
4
7
5
4
4
10
4
13
5
10
4
4
6
7
6
3
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
3
3
1
0
3
3
2
2
1
1
2
2
3
3
1
Adaptive
Total
10
18
Source: Data file MPR 2005.
53
Czech Demography, 2008, Vol. 2
Conclusion
In this article we tested whether Catherine Hakim’s much-discussed theory of a typology
of women (home-centred women, work-centred women, and adaptive women) based on lifestyle preferences relating to labour-market participation and the perception of the roles of
men and women in the family also applies in the Czech Republic. According to Hakim, the
typology should be a good predictor of women’s fertility behaviour and family policy preferences.
Based on a representative survey of Czech women aged 20–40 we found that Hakim’s typology does not work well in the Czech Republic. The distribution of the three types corresponds to Hakim’s findings in other European countries, but, contrary to Hakim’s assumptions, it is not a good predictor of expected or completed fertility. It does, however, apply as
expected in the case of women’s family policy preferences. Work-centred women favour
measures that help them combine work and family, while home-centred women favour measures that make it easier for them to remain at home and care for their children themselves.
Hakim vehemently promotes her typology and claims that it is a simple tool with which to
predict women’s fertility behaviour. Following our analyses, we are not altogether convinced
this is true. The findings relating to its ability to predict fertility were particularly disappointing. Hakim’s writings and conference papers had inspired the hope that by determining preferences and formulating lifestyle types we would be able to predict completed fertility. If her
typology did work and we were able with some probability to expect that differences between
women’s lifestyle preferences would be reflected in differences between their completed fertility, we would then be able to design the appropriate family policy based on this information. However, in the Czech context these hopes fell through.
One likely reason why women do not always follow the preference patterns expected under
Hakim’s typology is that the preferences the indicators are intended to capture do not relate
to the perceived value of children, which is a very important factor in explaining differences
in fertility intensity, and, as first demonstrated by Hoffman and Hoffman (1973) and then by
Nauck (2006), has played a significant role in international comparisons. Another likely reason is that the responses to the set of questions the typology is based on are contextually dependent. Consequently, they are not deeply embedded and unchanging aspects of a woman’s
personality that determine all the decisions women make between the ages of 20 and 40 about
the number of children to have.
References
Hamplová, D. – Rychtaříková, J. – Pikálková, S. 2003. České ženy, partnerství, reprodukce a rodina. Praha: Sociologický ústav AV ČR.
Hakim, C. 2000. Work-lifestyle Choices in the 21st Century: Preference Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hakim, C. 2003a. A New Approach to Explaining Fertility Patterns: Preference Theory. Population Development Review, 29, p. 349–374.
Hoffman, Lois W. – Hoffman, Martin L. 1973. The Value of Children to Parents. In James T. Fawcett (ed.). Psychological Perspectives on Population (p. 19–76). New York: Basic Books.
Kocourková, J. 2001. The Potential Impact of Fertility-related Policies on Future Fertility Developments in the
Czech Republic: Analysis Based on Surveys Conducted in the 1990s. Acta Universitatis Carolinae Geographica
1, p. 19–48.
Manea, B.-E. – Mrázová, M. – Rabušic, L. 2006. Teorie založená na lidských preferencích jako možný příspěvek
k vysvětlení současného reprodukčního chování. In T. Sirovátka (ed.). Rodina, zaměstnání, a sociální politika.
Boskovice: František Šalé-ALBERT, p. 55–76.
Nauck, B. 2006. The Value of Children and the Framing of Fertility. Resuls from a Cross-Cultural Comparative Survey in Ten Societies. (Manuscript for the European Sociological Review)
Rychtaříková, J. 2003. Diferenční plodnost v České republiky podle rodinného stav a vzdělání v kohortní perspektivě.
In D. Hamplová – J. Rychtaříková – S. Pikalková. 2003. České ženy: vzdělání, partnerství, reprodukce a rodina.
Praha: Sociologický ústav AV ČR, p. 41–83.
LADISLAV RABUŠIC is a professor in the Department of Sociology at the Faculty of Social Studies,
Masaryk University, in Brno, and he is currently also the Dean of the faculty. His main research inter54
Ladislav Rabušic – Beatrice-Elena Chromková Manea: Hakim’s Preference Theory in the Czech Context
ests are population studies and value changes. He is the author of dozens of papers and book chapters
published in the Czech Republic and abroad or presented at sociological and demographic conferences
inside the Czech Republic or abroad. In the Czech Republic he frequently publishes work in Sociologický časopis / Czech Sociological Review and in Demography. He is the author of a monograph on the
causes and effects of demographic ageing (Czech Society Is Ageing), is the editor of the book Czech
Society and Seniors, and he also published a monograph titled Where Have All the Children Gone?
on the causes of the low fertility rate in the Czech Republic. Low fertility and population policy are the
thesmes that is has recently been focusing on most.
BEATRICE-ELENA CHROMKOVÁ MANEA has worked at the Faculty of Social Sciences in Brno
and its Institute for Research on the Reproduction and Integration of Society since 2005. Her research
interests are population studies and especially low fertility, wherein her main focus is the single child
phenomenon. She is also interested in the issue of work-life balance. Last year she co-wrote a chapter
on the preference theory, which was published in T. Sirovátka (ed.) The Family, Work, and Social
Policy, and on which this article was based.
Appendix
H1. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements using a five-point scale
where 1 means agree strongly, 2 agree somewhat, 3 have no strong feelings either way, 4 disagree
somewhat and 5 disagree strongly:
a. Even when women work, the man should still be the main breadwinner in the family;
b. In times of high unemployment married women should stay at home.
H2. Who should have the ultimate responsibility for ensuring an adequate income for a family? The
male partner? The female partner? Or both equally?
H3. Who should have the ultimate responsibility for ensuring that the housework is done properly in
a household? The male partner? The female partner? Or both equally?
H4. If without having to work you had what you would regard as a reasonable living income, would
you still prefer to have a paid job? Yes, No, I do not know.
H5. People talk about the changing roles of husband and wife in the family. Here are three kinds of
family models. Which of them corresponds best with your ideas about the ideal family?
1. A family where the two partners each have an equally demanding job and where housework and
the care of the children are shared equally between them.
2. A family where the wife has a less demanding job than her husband and where she does the larger
share of housework and caring for the children.
3. A family where only the husband has a job and the wife runs the home.
4. None of these three cases.
H6. Who is the main income-earner in your household: respondent, partner, both of you jointly or
someone else?
55